Legal Opinion

Loyle v. Hertz Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 28, 2007PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

DANIELS, J.:

INTRODUCTION

¶ 1 This is an appeal from the lower court’s Order of March 5, 2007, which granted summary judgment in favor of Appellee, The Hertz Corporation (hereinafter “Hertz”), defendant below, based upon Hertz’s assertions that it was not the appropriate defendant in the subject action; for, as Hertz asserted in its summary judgment motion, Appellants contracted for the lease of the vehicle in question with Hertz Canada, Ltd. (Hertz Canada), a separate and distinct entity from Hertz and, therefore, Hertz Canada was the appropriate defendant in the case, and not Hertz.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Fine v. CheccioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Bolus v. United Penn BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Augustine Gizzi, and Anthony Giaccio v. Texaco, Inc., Appeal of Anthony GiaccioCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
  4. Ettinger v. Triangle-Pacific Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Reifsnyder v. DoughertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Myers v. Garfield & Johnson Enterprises, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
  2. C.S. v. Colony Insurance, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County2010
  3. Daniella Bonhomme; Tatiana Poulard; Aminique Kirnon; Selina Sacasa; and Quantavia Grant v. Denny’s, Inc., Gills Bloomsburg Inc. d/b/a Denny’s, Denny’s Corporation, and DFO, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2026
  4. Loyle v. Hertz Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Minch, M. v. KDG Rental Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API